| Submit your comments on this article |
| Economy |
| US to cut billions in oil subsidies |
| 2011-01-27 |
[Iran Press TV] US President Barack B.O.Obama has announced plans to eliminate billions of dollars of oil subsidies to invest in a project to produce clean energy. "I'm asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don't know if you've noticed, but they're doing just fine on their own," Obama said in his State of the Union address, on Tuesday. The president challenged the country to decrease its dependence on fossil fuels, stating that the US aims at producing 80 percent of its needed electricity from "clean energy sources" by 2035, AFP reported. Obama's remarks come as the US is struggling with a budget deficit which exceeds 11 percent of gross domestic product, according to the International Monetary Fund. The total deficit for fiscal year 2010 was nearly USD 1.5 trillion, according to the Government Spending. The national debt has grown from USD 8.6 trillion four years ago to more than USD 14 trillion now. "We're telling America's scientists and engineers that if they assemble teams of the best minds in their fields, and focus on the hardest problems in clean energy, we'll fund the Apollo Projects of our time," the US president said. "Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all, and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen," he added. Obama also pledged government support on conducting the necessary research projects in achieving breakthroughs in green energy. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #15 To misquote Denis Leary: Nuclear F-ing Screw the snail dater too put in more hydropower. |
| Posted by: No I am The Other Beldar 2011-01-27 12:53 |
| #14 I have a tough time listing any of my peers who would know what you mean by The Apollo Project, nevermind younger. Iranian Revolution II, Sputnik II, Apollo II (no Mercury II? oh yes bad name might remind people about thier gov mandated lights), Palin Plan II (across the board energy). Personally, Gemini II would be a more appropriate name as it would be the stage between initial work and conclusion. Penguin, donworryaboutit, it is possible that this initiative will provide grants and/or bailouts to those students involved in green activities and/or promote the cause. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2011-01-27 12:30 |
| #13 Bingo, penguin. |
| Posted by: lotp 2011-01-27 12:00 |
| #12 In 1969 they cut the oil depletion allowance. Four years later we had our first gas lines. Cause, meet effect. |
| Posted by: Fred 2011-01-27 10:38 |
| #11 No reason to be talking about science advances in the next two decades if you don't do something about students' lack of science proficiency. |
| Posted by: Penguin 2011-01-27 08:39 |
| #10 I don't consider they're giving my money to the oil companies. I look at it as a tax rebate. Which they are going to take away. So gorb has it right - a tax increase. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2011-01-27 06:17 |
| #9 OS: You say that as if they're not playing fast-and-loose with the definition of "subsidy" in the first place. How come noone ever pops up to say we're subsidizing imported oil because we're not putting an import tariff on it? |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2011-01-27 02:17 |
| #8 80% of our energy from 'clean' sources by 2035, eh? I am not enough of a civil engineer to do the back of the envelope calculation, but my SWAG is if we started now, using a known technology like coal-fired power plants, we would hard pressed to replace 80% of our generating capacity with new plants in 25 years. Anyone who actually has a clue care to venture a guess? Leaving aside legal niceties like environmental impact reviews and NIMBY lawsuits, could we replace 80% of our present generating capacity in 25 years? |
| Posted by: SteveS 2011-01-27 02:16 |
| #7 Cut subsidies? Ok. But cut the damned regulations too. Let 'em drill. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2011-01-27 01:29 |
| #6 You suck obama. |
| Posted by: newc 2011-01-27 01:10 |
| #5 The party that cancelled the Integral Fast Reactor (or whatever it was called in the 90's) and cancelled Yucca Mountain this time round is going to lead the Great Nuclear Rennaisance. Yeah. right. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2011-01-27 01:03 |
| #4 Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all... Liar. You have your EPA nazis fining Texas natural gas drillers every chance you can. The day you allow Nuclear plant construction will be the day hell freezes, over, and don't let me get started on what you think about coal plants. Two faced. |
| Posted by: Snolutch Hupaick6422 2011-01-27 00:51 |
| #3 They're doing just fine, that's why there's no more drilling in the Gulf, eh? |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2011-01-27 00:43 |
| #2 US aims at producing 80 percent of its needed electricity from "clean energy sources" by 2035 -- not a Chinaman's chance of doing that, unless the 'need' for electricity is cut by about 80%. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2011-01-27 00:40 |
| #1 This is called a tax increase, folks. |
| Posted by: gorb 2011-01-27 00:37 |